I'm not really sure who to believe on this one. They are basing this new charge on gun powder residue on the victim, but what was his story? Was he on the porch and shot from the street, or did he close the gap by walking up to the car before being shot, or vice versa (shooter walking up to victim)? Gun residue can prove range to the gun, but if he was close to the shooter, wouldn't it be similar to him shooting himself? Especially if he tried to defend himself by reaching for the gun as the weapon was fired, putting residue on his hand.